Next Article in Journal
New Approach for Brain Tumor Segmentation Based on Gabor Convolution and Attention Mechanism
Previous Article in Journal
The Logistics of Volkswagen Development Center Applies Operations Research to Optimize Transshipments
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Applied Sciences
Volume 14
Issue 11
10.3390/app14114918
applsci-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

A Systemic Model for Resilience and Time Management in Healthcare Academia: Application in a Dental University Setting

by
Maria Antoniadou
1,2,* and
Rallis Antoniadis
2,3
1
Department of Dentistry, School of Health Sciences, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, 11527 Athens, Greece
2
Certified Executive Mastering Program in Systemic Management (CSAP), University of Piraeus, 18534 Piraeus, Greece
3
Department of Informatics, University of Piraeus, 18534 Piraeus, Greece
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Appl. Sci. 2024, 14(11), 4918; https://doi.org/10.3390/app14114918
Submission received: 27 April 2024 / Revised: 25 May 2024 / Accepted: 30 May 2024 / Published: 6 June 2024
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:

Featured Application

The Timebooster Academic Systemic Model (TASM) serves as a framework for the revolutionization of time management in healthcare academia. TASM integrates predictive analytics and systemic management principles, offering possible solutions to current time management challenges and offering a basis for future innovations in optimizing academic productivity and well-being.

Abstract

The primary aim of this study was to provide a sustainable and systemic solution to the prevalent time management challenges within healthcare academia. The secondary aim was to explore the correlations between various factors influencing time management in a dental university setting. To achieve these objectives, a predictive model, the Timebooster Academic Systemic Model (TASM), was developed. This model was crafted through systemic analysis software and a systemic management approach, utilizing three fundamental pillars: teaching, research, and administrative tasks. Soft skill cultivation, automation implementation, the delegation of administrative responsibilities, and the role of resilient academic manager–leaders were also examined. The study found that prioritizing administrative tasks often consumes valuable academic time, resulting in excessive costs and lowered resilience levels among academicians. TASM proposes solutions such as soft skill cultivation, full automation, delegation, and the mitigation of time-consuming elements, emphasizing the role of resilient academic manager–leaders in enhancing collaboration and teamwork. Time management challenges significantly impact academic well-being and resilience. In conclusion, systemic models like TASM provide a valuable framework to address prioritization concerns, identify administrative obstacles, and manage low-value time-consuming tasks within academia in a systemic manner.

1. Introduction

In contemporary academia, the challenge of time management has become particularly acute as individuals address the complexities of multitasking and balancing diverse responsibilities within their professional and personal lives [1]. Unlike conventional business commodities, time cannot be created, stored, or saved for future use, demanding a unique approach to its management [2]. Leo Tolstoy’s assertion in War and Peace that “The two most powerful warriors are patience and time” underscores the significance of timely decision-making in avoiding costly business mistakes.
This imperative becomes even more pronounced in the volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous (VUCA) current environment, where individuals, especially those in healthcare organizations, must work in a constant state of change [3,4]. The demands placed on professionals in such an environment necessitate effective time management for the sustainability of their endeavors. Job demands, defined as the difficulties or challenges experienced in each role, play a crucial part in determining job satisfaction [5]. However, the manageable nature of these demands influences individuals’ satisfaction and success in their roles [6,7]. They also cause heightened levels of anxiety, stress, and potential health issues [8,9,10,11]. In response to these challenges, effective time management emerges as a pivotal process, involving strategic planning, realistic objective setting, and the efficient allocation of resources [12]. Alan (2009) [13] emphasizes the importance of not only planning but also protecting scheduled time and adjusting others’ expectations.
Within the healthcare academic community, predominantly occupied by academic professors responsible for teaching, mentoring, and research, the freedom to pursue passions is often compromised by financial constraints and workforce reductions post-pandemic [14,15,16]. Mid-career academic professionals express dissatisfaction with their limited career development opportunities, current positions, and insufficient research time [17,18]. More specifically, healthcare academicians, engaged in academic responsibilities, clinical training, and practice, face intensified time-related challenges [19]. Despite recognizing the importance of time management, academic professors, especially women, struggle to balance their professional duties and personal lives [10,11,20]. Balancing multiple roles, often extending beyond the standard working hours, further complicates time management [21,22,23,24,25].
However, efficient time management is vital, impacting productivity and satisfaction [26,27,28,29,30,31,32]. Eliminating time-consuming tasks allows a focus on high-value activities, increasing productivity [33,34]. This enhanced productivity then boosts self-satisfaction and motivation [35], while job satisfaction is closely linked to time control and organizational skills [32]. Effective time management also leads to economic success, benefiting individuals and institutions [32]. Moreover, reduced time wastage increases efficiency, potentially leading to greater financial gains [33,34]. In today’s job market, punctuality and organization are highly valued and often take precedence over technical proficiency [36]. In academia, improved productivity enhances resource allocation and academic and financial sustainability [35].
Healthcare academicians face unique time management challenges due to their multifaceted roles [24,36]. Balancing teaching, mentoring, research, and clinical duties, they work in a complex “ecosystem” where time is finite and critical. The integration of academic and clinical responsibilities introduces huge complexity [37]. The unpredictable nature of clinical settings requires adaptability from healthcare academicians [38], while staying current with healthcare advancements adds to their time demands [39]. In this dynamic environment, strategic time management is essential in maintaining academic rigor and quality clinical education [20]. Further, healthcare academicians must develop adaptive approaches tailored to their unique challenges, ensuring that they effectively fulfill their diverse responsibilities while staying abreast of healthcare industry developments [40].
Although there is literature on time management outside academia, limited information is available for academic professionals, particularly in the healthcare sector [11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24]. The systemic approach, emphasizing the study of systems as cohesive entities rather than the mere conglomeration of parts, offers a framework to comprehensively understand the interconnected factors influencing time management in the higher educational system [15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27]. Constructing interpretable models explicitly enables a holistic view of how the influencing factors interact, guiding decision-making and providing insights into time-wasting processes within healthcare academia [28,29,30,31].
The primary aim of this study is thus to provide a sustainable and systemic solution to the prevalent time management challenges within healthcare academia by designing a systemic model with the use of relevant software. The secondary aim is to explore the correlations between various factors influencing time management in this model using the case of a dental university setting.

2. Design of the System’s Theoretical Base

2.1. Time Management Approaches and Techniques in Academia

Strategic time management in healthcare academia empowers individuals to make autonomous decisions about their work schedules and task delegation [41,42], including active participation in meetings, taking periodic breaks, and prioritizing projects that align with their personal or professional development [43,44,45]. Essential techniques include preemptive planning, list-making, and strategic time ordering [21,41,46]. List-making aids task prioritization and delegation, while strategic time ordering supports extended focused work for rigorous research [36,47]. Recognizing the need for breaks after major projects is also crucial [43]. Focusing on projects that align with hierarchical progression or personal spiritual journeys and cultivating habits like limited distraction and singularity of purpose further enhance time management [44,48]. Finally, using a month-long calendar for the planning and sequencing of activities with urgency codes improves productivity [21,41,46], while the psychological reward of completing tasks boosts motivation [49].
Research indicates that fewer than one in five employees use a proper time management system, with many relying on lists or email inboxes [50]. The least effective technique is addressing tasks as they arise [51,52,53], while frequent email checking undermines productivity [50]. As is already reported, the Eisenhower matrix helps to categorize tasks by urgency and importance, aiding in prioritization [33,54]. Urgent tasks require immediate attention, important tasks need proactive planning, and non-urgent, non-important tasks can be eliminated or delegated [55,56] (Figure 1). Kamoun (2022) [57] notes the Eisenhower matrix’s limitations and suggests task shuffling for better balance, promoting adaptability and a holistic view of task management [58,59,60]. Moreover, perfectionism poses challenges by causing self-criticism, procrastination, and a reluctance to delegate, leading to burnout and reduced productivity [61,62,63,64,65]. Overall, from the relevant literature, it is derived that effective time management in healthcare academia involves a combination of strategic planning, prioritization, the use of frameworks like the Eisenhower matrix, and the management of perfectionistic and procrastination tendencies for healthier and more productive work practices.

2.2. The Timebooster Approach in Academic Time Management

Among the global challenges in academia, personalized time management strategies are vital, especially in the mid-career stages, requiring resilience and motivation [66,67]. The “Timebooster approach” presented here is the basis of the proposed systemic model; it emphasizes strategic delegation to save time and optimize planning [68] through optimizing a leader role. Prioritizing tasks based on career evolution, incorporating enjoyable tasks, and integrating time management across all academic pillars are important [69,70,71]. Cultivating calmness, sustaining motivation, and strategic prioritization further improve time management in healthcare academia [72,73,74,75,76]. Setting boundaries to minimize interruptions, such as defining standard interaction times with students and personnel, preserves energy and well-being [77]. Addressing timewasters like perfectionism and procrastination finally adds a spiritual perspective, fostering joy in academic pursuits and detachment from the results [78]. These factors can be controlled with short educational experiences within academia from coaches, time management mentors, and mindfulness practices [79,80,81,82,83]. Moreover, professional development programs, waste reduction initiatives, and process improvement programs ensure a balanced approach and enhance overall resilience [80,81,82,83].
Finally, word of mouth (WOM) significantly influences behavioral changes in education, promoting better well-being among students and educators. WOM facilitates the spread of personal experiences and endorsements, creating a sense of trust and authenticity that can effectively encourage positive behaviors and attitudes [84]. In educational settings, peer recommendations and shared experiences about well-being practices, such as mindfulness, exercise, and time management strategies, can motivate others to adopt similar habits [85]. Research indicates that WOM is particularly powerful in shaping attitudes and behaviors because individuals are more likely to act on information received from trusted sources within their social networks [86]. Furthermore, WOM can reinforce the benefits of well-being initiatives, reinforcing a supportive community that values and practices holistic health approaches, thus enhancing the overall well-being culture in educational environments [87].

3. Methodology of the Systemic Design of the Model

3.1. Modeling and Simulation

The systemic model presented in this study is referred to as the “Timebooster Academic Systemic Model—TASM”. Its objective is to conceptualize and simulate the dissemination of the time management philosophy within healthcare academia, working on all factors addressed in the literature, as mentioned before. It is divided into several pillars of sustainability and is presented in Table 1.
To further explore the fundamental factors influencing time management in healthcare academia, we took data for all pillars available and relevant values from the Department of Dentistry of the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Greece. We used the program for the academic year 2023–2024 of the department to calculate the mean hours spent on teaching and clinical instruction for the mid-level academicians of the department. We also used the real feedback of five colleagues (a total of 63 members of the academic staff of the department), who consented to be interviewed by the same investigator, at the same office, and within a period of one week in February 2023, to give their estimation of the hours spent per pillar per week over this period.
Our hypothesis posits that academicians—specifically dentists in this context—embracing the time management philosophy described before will be influenced by colleagues who recognize its benefits and are either contemplating its implementation or are already practicing it in their academic roles. We anticipate varying responses, with some being informed about time management yet taking no further action, while others adopt the basic time management principles outlined in this study. Some may choose to implement a comprehensive time management program, fostering collaboration, prioritization, delegation, and a focus on their evaluation processes. We assume that academicians who are knowledgeable and proficient in time management will serve as influencers among their peers.
Drawing on the Socio-Ecological Model of Communication, which underscores the importance of understanding the intricate system within which the target audience operates [88], our model introduces an interaction factor that influences academic cooperation, providing a dynamic aspect to our system. The Socio-Ecological Communication Model for Social and Behavioral Change emphasizes the role of word-of-mouth (WOM) information transfer [89], which we believe will impact the dynamics of the systemic model. In our approach, we aim to shed light on the complexity, interdependence, and totality of the components within this complex adaptive system, avoiding the isolation of specific components from the larger system in which they are embedded.
In our study, we posit that the novel approach to time management in healthcare academia will be introduced to the faculty of the Department of Dentistry at the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens. The potential user base for this philosophy is equated to the total number of dental academic staff (N = 63). Initially, all potential recipients fall into the category of TimeOFF academicians, with a small subset designated as TimeON academicians (N = 6). We assume that TimeOFF academicians currently do not employ any fundamental time management principles.
At a given time, any academician falls into exactly one of the three states (TimeOFF_Academician, Motivated_Academician, TimeON_Academician) of the following state chart (Figure 2).
Motivation for implementing the time management philosophy among TimeOFF academicians may arise voluntarily, through training programs such as time management seminars (time edu hours), or through influences from colleagues (word of mouth) and other influencing factors, both positive (academic level and support) and negative (timewasters). The adoption of changes will require both the need and time for these academicians to react (time to react).
Essentially, we posit that TimeON dentists (TimeON_Academicians) will serve as influencers, motivating TimeOFF dentists (TimeOFF_Academicians) to become motivated dentists (Motivated_Academicians), and finally adopt time management practices and become TimeON dentists (TimeON_Academicians). The degree of influence depends on the number of TimeON dentists relative to the total number of academic dentists and the extent of their interaction (contact) with TimeOFF dentists and other stakeholders, defining the adoption from WOM. The TimeON dentist, motivated dentist, and TimeOFF dentist teams form the accumulation points or levels in the model, while other factors either serve as system parameters (“constant”) or play a parameter role in describing the phenomenon of time management in academia.
These parameters serve as indicators for
  • The number of academic dentists embracing time management practices;
  • The initial count of dentists integrating time management practices;
  • The anticipated progression of dental personnel maturation, representing an increasing percentage of the total potential users of the time management philosophy;
  • The average time needed for an academic professional to mature and adopt new time management practices.
The objective is to illustrate the evolving knowledge and practices of academicians over time, providing academia with insights into the dynamic influences of this phenomenon. The resulting benefits encompass:
-
Determining the timeframe for the complete dissemination of time management practices in academia;
-
Assessing the number of dentists within each subcategory, aiding in the planning of tailored educational support activities;
-
Identifying weaknesses in the dissemination of knowledge about time management;
-
Identifying and exploring factors influencing the spread of the Timebooster approach to time management.
In our model, the acceptance rate of the Timebooster time management philosophy is contingent upon the elements and the settings described in the following Table 2.
The causality diagram of the hypothesis is presented in Figure 3.

3.2. Model Simulation

The model of the system that describes the phenomenon of the spread of time management for the Timebooster approach in dental academicians is implemented using the AnyLogic simulation software (AnyLogic Model, AnyLogic Model: https://cloud.anylogic.com/model/4b05e7b8-0b4f-4b05-941d-1daf6801ae4b?mode=DASHBOARD) (accessed 20 January 2024). To simulate, the program requires the definition of some initial settings, namely the administration, education, research, academic support, time educ hours, academic level, workload, timewasters, adoption fraction, and contact rate.
The values in our model are the numerical values of the variables and the units indicate what is being measured by each variable. The behavior of the model over time is also examined using the software. A period of five years is chosen so that any results are evident. The choice of period can be changed through the model.
To monitor the evolution of the model over time, two tables of diagrams, Graphs1 and Graphs2, have been designed, and they are depicted in Figure 4 and Figure 5.

3.3. Model Execution

The model is first executed with the help of the relevant software for the variable values referred to in Table 3 (Example 1), where the values were derived from the mean scores. We collected data from the calculations of time performed over the program and the interviews of the personnel, thus attributing to the factors specific percentages.
Figure 6 shows the initial stage of the model execution based on the values of Table 3, while Figure 7 shows the final stage of model execution for a period of 60 months. All figures are the results of running experiments for different values of the variables in the AnyLogic cloud. The control panel interface enables the user of the model to change the values of the parameters that they are interested in and to see the behavior of the model over time before deciding to make changes to any of them. The end user of the model is anyone who wishes to predict the positive or negative results of any change that they wish to make and decide accordingly.
The academicians’ transition from the TimeOFF_Academician state to the Motivated_Academician and the TimeON_Academician states over time is demonstrated in the graphs of Figure 8.
The tasks’ progress over time is depicted in Figure 9.
To demonstrate the importance of the WOM effect in the transition process and the effects on the tasks’ progress, we executed the model for the values of the variables shown in Table 3, but we changed the contact rate from 0, as mentioned in Table 3, to 2 (Example 2). WOM is the positive effect of word-of-mouth information dissemination, which is supposed to be a spontaneous process among colleagues. In this sense, we tested the model, enabling different factors to be more evident according to the conditions of the group of dentist academicians in the Department of Dentistry, while the model was executed. The experiment is still ongoing. To test the reliability of the process, we conducted several experiments with different parameter values.
The resulting graphs are depicted in Figure 10 and Figure 11 for Example 2.
If we run the model for values presented in Table 3 and for its variation in Example 2, we have the graphs presented in Figure 12 and Figure 13 where red and blue colors suggest differences over time in the execution of the model for the two cases.
In Figure 13, a comparison is given for the TimeOFF academicians, the motivated academicians, the TimeON academicians, and the combination of all three categories. According to Example 1, using the values of Table 3, all TimeOFF academicians become TimeON academicians after 51 months, while, according to Example 2 (values A of Example 2) (Table S1), all Time OFF academicians become Time ON academicians after 16 months. We can observe the much faster transition of the academicians from the TimeOFF to the TimeON state, as well as the larger number of motivated academicians resulting from the contacts and the word-of-mouth effect. As a result, a higher peak can be observed in the original tasks as well as in the progress over time, as shown in Figure 13.
Next, we present some variations of the A values of Example 2, forming Example 3 of TASM’s execution (Table 4).
The comparison of the executions for the values of Table 4 is depicted in Figure 14 and Figure 15.
According to Table S2 (Supplementary Materials), using the B values of Table 4, all TimeOFF academicians become TimeON academicians after 16 months, while, according to Table S3 (Supplementary Materials), using the C values of Table 4, all TimeOFF academicians become TimeON academicians after 12 months. One may now observe the faster transition of the academicians from the TimeOFF to the TimeON state, as well as the larger number of motivated academicians resulting from the motivation effect due to academic factors. As a result, a higher peak can be observed in the original tasks as well as in the progress over time as shown in Figure 15, while there are fewer completed tasks due to the lower workload.
With these cost parameters, the pace of transformation for TimeOFF dentists will increase at a gradual rate, failing to complete the phenomenon within the study period of 60 months. This suggests that as administrative tasks and time-wasting activities peak, the rate of transformation slows, which aligns with expectations for academicians overwhelmed by extensive non-academic responsibilities. Various scenarios within the model demonstrate its dynamic nature, performing effectively based on the parameters provided.

4. Discussion

Our study explored the application of behavioral change management, communication principles, and practical methodologies like the Eisenhower matrix and the Timebooster approach within the healthcare academic context. The Timebooster Academic Systemic Model (TASM) offers insights that allow us to understand and address the behavioral dynamics of academic time management [24]. The model emphasizes the importance of recognizing individual perceptions of time, establishing clear communication channels, and promoting collaborative problem-solving. These principles help academicians to coach themselves and others through word-of-mouth practices to effectively manage time complexities in the work environment [90].
One key aspect highlighted by TASM is the importance of recognizing the interconnectedness of individual behaviors and systemic factors within the academic environment, as mentioned elsewhere [91]. Effective time management is not solely reliant on individual efforts but also on the organizational culture, support structures, and communication channels in place [24]. Therefore, interventions aimed at improving time management must consider both individual behaviors and systemic influences, such as leadership styles, institutional policies, and communication norms [92,93].
Effective communication is essential for successful time management in healthcare academia, as shown by our model [71]. TASM suggests that if we foster a culture of effective communication, healthcare academic institutions can cultivate an environment in which academicians feel supported, valued, and empowered to optimize their time management strategies. This emphasis on communication through WOM that the model suggests aligns further with research indicating that open channels for the expression of needs and management of change are crucial for staff well-being and program adaptation [24]. Thus, effective communication stands as a cornerstone for success, aligning employees’ goals with organizational purposes [94]. Establishing frequent, friendly, ethical, and consistent workplace communications is essential in building resilience and addressing crises effectively as a team [17,95,96,97].
Moreover, the Timebooster Academic Systemic Model (TASM) demonstrates the efficacy of integrating practical methodologies such as the Eisenhower matrix and the Timebooster approach within healthcare academia to enhance time management skills systematically [98]. When researchers adopt a systemic approach, they can address the complexities of time management more comprehensively, as suggested by previous studies emphasizing the importance of systemic thinking in designing effective time management tools for the workplace [99]. This holistic perspective allows for an in-depth understanding of the interconnections between various aspects of time management, facilitating the development of tailored strategies to improve productivity and well-being in academic settings.
In addition to individual-level interventions, the role of academic administrators in alleviating administrative burdens and promoting effective time management is crucial [100]. Our model highlights the importance of this factor in time management initiatives in healthcare academia. Bozeman et al. (2020) [101] discuss the impact of computer-automated research grant management systems, or robotic bureaucracy, in organizing administrative processes and reducing the burden on academic staff. Automating tasks such as grant application processing, compliance monitoring, and reporting can significantly reduce time and effort, enhance efficiency, reduce errors, and improve overall productivity [101]. Automation frees valuable time for academic staff, allowing them to focus on research, teaching, and knowledge dissemination. This not only benefits individual researchers but also advances scientific discovery and innovation [102,103]. The adoption of automated systems in academia is therefore essential for a more efficient, productive, and supportive academic environment. Insights from TASM suggest further that academic administrators play a key role in shaping the organizational culture, establishing support structures, and implementing policies that facilitate efficient time management practices for the rest of the personnel [24]. By delegating administrative tasks, providing training and resources, and creating a supportive work environment, academic administrators and automation can empower healthcare academicians to focus on their core responsibilities and achieve their professional goals [104].
As we report from the running of our model, implementing time management programs in healthcare academia requires meticulous systemic planning, resource allocation, and evaluation to address the challenges faced by academicians [17]. These programs should aim to enhance efficiency and productivity in research, teaching, and administration, promising benefits like increased job satisfaction and academic performance [1,98]. Successful execution depends on understanding the associated costs and challenges, necessitating strategic resource allocation and rigorous evaluation frameworks [20]. Thus, institutions must invest in training, technology infrastructure, and administrative support [17,20,102,103,104,105,106], with adequate financial and personnel resources to ensure smooth implementation and minimal disruption [107]. Evaluation mechanisms are also crucial in assessing the impact of these programs on productivity and well-being, guiding informed decision-making and future investments [17,20]. Overcoming challenges like resistance to change and technological barriers requires proactive measures, stakeholder engagement, and ongoing support to ensure the successful adoption and sustainability of time management initiatives through systems dynamics research [105,106].
Overall, the TASM model highlights the progression of time management evaluation in a healthcare (dental) academic setting. At this juncture, the lack of historical data for our model limits its capacity to fully optimize specific situations, and, thus, limitations exist. The model’s effectiveness is partly contingent on the unique cultural and institutional contexts of individual academic environments, which may limit the generalizability of the findings across different settings. Additionally, the reliance on self-reported data may introduce biases, affecting the accuracy of the results. Future research should explore the longitudinal impacts of TASM on academic productivity and well-being and examine the model’s applicability in diverse academic and healthcare contexts to control or measure the output and impacts of scholarly activities performed by academics in all sectors, which typically include teaching, research, publishing, and service to the academic community. Investigating the role of technology integration, such as automated systems for administrative tasks, and their influence on time management practices will also be essential. Further studies should focus on developing comprehensive evaluation systemic frameworks to measure the long-term effectiveness of time management interventions, considering both individual behaviors and systemic influences, such as leadership styles and institutional policies [92,93].

5. Conclusions

Systemic models like TASM provide a valuable framework to address prioritization concerns, identify administrative obstacles, and manage low-value, time-consuming tasks within academia. Effective time management in healthcare academia requires a multifaceted approach that integrates behavioral change management, communication principles, practical methodologies, and institutional support structures. TASM offers guidance in understanding the complexities of time management and fostering a culture of efficiency and well-being in healthcare academic institutions. It can serve as a predictive and strategic decision-making tool for the implementation of time management principles in healthcare academia.

6. Patents

The TASM model represents a patented systems-thinking approach to time management in healthcare academia.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/app14114918/s1, Table S1: Model execution using Values A of Example 2. Table S2: Model execution using Values B of Table 4. Table S3: Model execution using Values C of Table 4.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, M.A.; methodology, M.A. and R.A.; software, M.A. and R.A.; validation, M.A. and R.A.; formal analysis, R.A.; investigation, M.A.; resources, M.A. and R.A.; data curation, R.A.; writing—review and editing, M.A. and R.A.; visualization, M.A.; supervision, M.A.; project administration, M.A.; funding acquisition, M.A. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

All necessary data are shown in the article and Supplementary Materials.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Goldsby, E.; Goldsby, M.; Neck, C.B.; Neck, C.P. Under Pressure: Time Management, Self-Leadership, and the Nurse Manager. Adm. Sci. 2020, 10, 38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Gluck, W.F.; Kaufman, P.S.; Walleck, S. Strategic Management for Competitive Advantage. Harvard Business Review. July 1980. Available online: https://hbr.org/1980/07/strategic-management-for-competitive-advantage (accessed on 20 February 2024).
  3. Symonds, M. The World Is VUCA—How Are You Going To Deal With It? Forbes. 1 March 2023. Available online: https://www.forbes.com/sites/mattsymonds/2023/03/01/the-world-is-vuca--how-are-you-going-to-deal-with-it/?sh=4867982f255a (accessed on 6 March 2024).
  4. Baldwin, S. Living in a VUCA World. 29 March 2022. Available online: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/living-vuca-world-scottbaldwin?trk=articles_directory (accessed on 30 March 2024).
  5. Hambrick, D.C.; Finkelstein, S.; Mooney, A. Executive Job Demands: New Insights for Explaining Strategic Decisions and Leader Behaviors. Acad. Manag. Rev. 2005, 30, 472–491. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Gardner, J.W. The Nature of Leadership: Introductory Considerations; Leadership Studies Program, Independent Sector: Washington, DC, USA, 1986. [Google Scholar]
  7. Judge, T.A.; Thoresen, C.J.; Bon, J.E.; Patton, G.K. The job satisfaction, job performance relationship a qualitative and quantitative review. Psychol. Bull. 2001, 127, 376–407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Wall, T.D.; Jackson, P.R.; Mullarkey, S.; Parker, S. The Demand-Control Model of Job Strain: A More Specific Test. J. Occup. Organ. Psychol. 1996, 69, 153–166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Theorell, T.; Karasek, R.A. Current Issues Relating to Psychosocial Job Strain and Cardiovascular Disease. Res. J. Occup. Health Psychol. 1996, 1, 9–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. Antoniadou, M. Leadership and Managerial Skills in Dentistry: Characteristics and Challenges Based on a Preliminary Case Study. Dent. J. 2022, 10, 146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Antoniadou, M. Quality of Life and Satisfaction from Career and Work–Life Integration of Greek Dentists before and during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 9865. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Daraio, C.; Bonaccorsi, A.; Simar, L. Rankings and University Performance: A Conditional Multidimensional Approach. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2015, 244, 918–930. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Allam, Z.; Ahmad, S. An Empirical Study of Quality in Higher Education in Relation to Stakeholders’ Perspectives. J. Am. Sci. 2013, 9, 387–401. [Google Scholar]
  14. Condon, W.; Iverson, E.R.; Manduca, C.A.; Rutz, C.; Willett, G. Faculty Development and Student Learning: Assessing the Connections; Indiana University Press: Bloomington, IN, USA, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  15. Brown, J.; Kurzweil, M. Instructional Quality, Student Outcomes, and Institutional Finances; American Council on Education: Washington, DC, USA, 2018; Available online: https://www.acenet.edu/Documents/Instructional-Quality-Student-Outcomes-and-Institutional-Finances.pdf (accessed on 20 April 2024).
  16. Gewin, V. Has the ‘Great Resignation’ Hit Academia? 31 May 2022. Available online: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-01512-6 (accessed on 30 March 2024).
  17. Bass, R.; Eynon, B.; Gambino, L.M. The New Learning Compact: A Framework for Professional Learning and Educational Change. Every Learner Everywhere. 2019. Available online: https://www.everylearnersolve.com/asset/YAhR8dclZb0mzn4v2zXh (accessed on 20 April 2024).
  18. Roy, S.; Edwards, M.A. NSF Fellows’ perceptions about incentives, research misconduct, and scientific integrity in STEM academia. Sci. Rep. 2023, 13, 5701. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Gralka, S. Stochastic Frontier Analysis in Higher Education: A Systematic Review; CEPIE Working Papers 05/18; Technische Universität Dresden, Center of Public and International Economics (CEPIE): Dresden, Germany, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  20. Aeon, B.; Faber, A.; Panaccio, A. Does time management work? A meta-analysis. PLoS ONE 2021, 16, e0245066. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Ailamaki, A.; Gehrke, J. Time Management for New Faculty. Sigmod Rec. 2003, 32, 230–236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Hillestad, S.G.; Berkowitz, E.N. Health Care Market Strategy: From Planning to Action; Jones and Bartlett Learning: Burlington, MA, USA, 2004. [Google Scholar]
  23. Dodd, P.; Sundheim, D. The 25 Best Time Management Tools and Techniques: How to Get More Done without Driving Yourself Crazy; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2011. [Google Scholar]
  24. Antoniadou, M.; Mangoulia, P.; Myrianthefs, P. Quality of Life and Wellbeing Parameters of Academic Dental and Nursing Personnel vs. Quality of Services. Healthcare 2023, 11, 2792. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Donnadieu, G. L’Approche Systémique: De Quoi S’agit-il? Synthèse des Travaux du Groupe AFSCET; Diffusion de la pensée systémique; 2003; pp. 1–11. [Google Scholar]
  26. Ackoff, R.L.; Emery, F.E. On Purposeful Systems; Tavistock Publications: London, UK, 1972. [Google Scholar]
  27. Arnold, E. Evaluating Research and Innovation Policy: A Systems World Needs Systems Evaluations’. Res. Eval. 2004, 13, 3–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. De La Torre, E.M.; Casani, F.; Sagarra, M. Defining Typologies of Universities through a DEA-MDS Analysis: An Institutional Characterization for Formative Evaluation Purposes. Res. Eval. 2018, 27, 388–403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Waldrop, M.M. Complexity: The Emerging Science at the Edge of Order and Chaos; Simon and Schuster Paperbacks: New York, NY, USA, 1992. [Google Scholar]
  30. Jackson, M.C. Fifty Years of Systems Thinking for Management. J. Oper. Res. Soc. 2009, 60, S24–S32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Wieczorek, A.J.; Hekkert, M.P. Systemic Instruments for Systemic Innovation Problems: A Framework for Policy Makers and Innovation Scholars. Sci. Public Policy 2012, 39, 74–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Fagefors, C.; Lantz, B.; Rosén, P. Creating Short-Term Volume Flexibility in Healthcare Capacity Management. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public. Health 2020, 17, 8514. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Covey, S. The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People; Fireside; Simon & Schuster: New York, NY, USA, 1990. [Google Scholar]
  34. Harris, J. Time Management 100 Success Secrets: The 100 Most Asked Questions on Skills, Tips, Training, Tools and Techniques for Effective Time Management; Lulu Publications: Morrisville, NC, USA, 2008. [Google Scholar]
  35. Laredo, P. Revisiting the Third Mission of Universities: Toward a Renewed Categorization of University Activities? High. Educ. Policy 2007, 20, 441–456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Osterman, R. Attitudes count “soft skills” top list of what area employer’s desire. Sacramento Bee, 23 May 2005. [Google Scholar]
  37. Hashemiparast, M.; Negarandeh, R.; Theofanidis, D. Exploring the barriers of utilizing theoretical knowledge in clinical settings: A qualitative study. Int. J. Nurs. Sci. 2019, 6, 399–405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Vizeshfar, F.; Rakhshan, M.; Shirazi, F.; Dokoohaki, R. The effect of time management education on critical care nurses’ prioritization: A randomized clinical trial. Acute Crit. Care 2022, 37, 202–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. Metty, P.; Maglaras, L.; Amine Ferrag, M.; Almomani, I. Digitization of healthcare sector: A study on privacy and security concerns. ICT Express 2023, 9, 571–588. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Mhlongo, S.; Mbatha, K.; Ramatsetse, B.; Dlamini, R. Challenges, opportunities, and prospects of adopting and using smart digital technologies in learning environments: An iterative review. Heliyon 2023, 9, e16348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Begley, T. Effective Time Management; The New Jersey Lawyer, Inc.: Trenton, NJ, USA, 2005; Volume 14, p. A6. [Google Scholar]
  42. Cummings, R.; Holmes, L. Business Faculty time management: Lessons learned from the trenches. Am. J. Bus. Educ. 2009, 2, 25–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Tobis, M.; Tobis, I. Managing Multiple Projects; McGraw-Hill Professional: New York, NY, USA, 2002. [Google Scholar]
  44. Shaw, D. Who has time for success? Manag. Online 2005, 3, 2. [Google Scholar]
  45. Borrás, S.; Edquist, C. Holistic Innovation Policy: Theoretical Foundations, Policy Problems, and Instrument Choices; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  46. Rigby, D.; Sutherland, S.; Takeuchi, H.; Embracing Agile. Harvard Business Review. May 2016. Available online: https://hbr.org/2016/05/embracing-agile (accessed on 20 February 2024).
  47. Buljac-Samardzic, M.; Doekhie, K.D.; van Wijngaarden, J.D.H. Interventions to improve team effectiveness within health care: A systematic review of the past decade. Hum. Resour. Health 2020, 18, 2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Collie, R.; Holliman, A.; Martin, A. Adaptability, engagement and academic achievement at university. Educ. Psychol. 2016, 37, 632–647. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Fleming, I. The Time Management Pocketbook, 6th ed.; Management Pocketbooks: Alresford, UK, 2011. [Google Scholar]
  50. Acuity Training. 2022. Available online: https://www.acuitytraining.co.uk/news-tips/time-management-statistics-2022-research/ (accessed on 20 April 2024).
  51. Porta, C.R.; Anderson, M.R.; Steele, S.R. Effective time management: Surgery, research, service, travel, fitness, and family. Clin. Colon Rectal Surg. 2013, 26, 239–243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Asana Team. The Eisenhower Matrix: How to Prioritize Your To-Do List. 29 January 2024. Available online: https://asana.com/resources/eisenhower-matrix (accessed on 20 March 2024).
  53. Kennedy, D.R.; Porter, A.L. The Illusion of Urgency. Am. J. Pharm. Educ. 2022, 86, 8914. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Miyake, A.; Kane, M.J. Toward a Holistic Approach to Reducing Academic Procrastination With Classroom Interventions. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 2022, 31, 291–304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Thomson, T. Management by Objectives, 2nd ed.; Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer; The Pfeiffer Library, 1998; Volume 20, Available online: http://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://home.snu.edu/~jsmith/library/body/v20.pdf (accessed on 20 March 2024).
  56. Coito, T.; Firme, B.; Martins, M.S.E.; Vieira, S.M.; Figueiredo, J.; Sousa, J.M.C. Intelligent Sensors for Real-Time Decision-Making. Automation 2021, 2, 62–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Kamoun, S. Time Management for Academics—Forget about the Eisenhower Method. 2022. Available online: https://kamounlab.medium.com/time-management-for-academics-forgetabout-the-eisenhower-method-15b380ade0a8 (accessed on 20 March 2024). [CrossRef]
  58. Kuh, G.D.; O’Donnell, K.O.; Schneider, C.G. HIPs at ten. Chang. Mag. High. Learn. 2017, 49, 8–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Van Vught, F. Mission Diversity and Reputation in Higher Education. High. Educ. Policy 2008, 21, 151–174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Paige, R.D. The Relationship between Self-Directed Informal Learning and the Career Development Process of Technology Users. Walden University ScholarWorks. Ph.D. Thesis, Walden University, Minneapolis, MN, USA, 2007. Available online: https://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1013&context=hodgkinson (accessed on 20 April 2024).
  61. Kamushadze, T.; Martskvishvili, K.; Mestvirishvili, M.; Odilavadze, M. Does Perfectionism Lead to Well-Being? The Role of Flow and Personality Traits. Eur. J. Psychol. 2021, 17, 43–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Antony, M.M.; Swinson, R.P. When Perfect Isn’t Good Enough, 2nd ed.; New Harbinger: Oakland, CA, USA, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  63. Patterson, H.; Firebaugh, C.; Zolnikov, T.; Wardlow, R.; Morgan, S.; Gordon, B. A Systematic Review on the Psychological Effects of Perfectionism and Accompanying Treatment. Psychology 2021, 12, 1–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Babaei, S.; Dehghani, M.; Lavasani, F.F.; Ashouri, A.; Mohamadi, L. The effectiveness of short-term dynamic/interpersonal group therapy on perfectionism; assessment of anxiety, depression and interpersonal problems. Res. Psychother. 2022, 25, 656. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Rhaiem, M. Measurement and Determinants of Academic Research Efficiency: A Systematic Review of the Evidence. Scientometrics 2017, 110, 581–615. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Xue, L. Challenges and Resilience-Building: A Narrative Inquiry Study on a Mid-Career Chinese EFL Teacher. Front. Psychol. Sec. Posit. Psychol. 2021, 12, 115–118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Chase, J.A.; Topp, R.; Smith, C.E.; Cohen, M.Z.; Fahrenwald, N.; Zerwic, J.J.; Benefield, L.E.; Anderson, C.M.; Conn, V.S. Time management strategies for research productivity. West. J. Nurs. Res. 2013, 35, 155–176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Antoniadou, M. Application of the Humanities and Basic Principles of Coaching in the Health Sciences; Tsotras: Athens, Greece, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  69. Cissna, K. Self-Actualized Leadership: Exploring the Intersection of Inclusive Leadership and Workplace Spirituality at a Faith-Based Institution of Higher Education; Pepperdine University: Malibu, CA, USA, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  70. Getman-Eraso, J.; Culkin, K. High-impact catalyst for success: ePortfolio integration in the first-year seminar. In Catalyst in Action: Case Studies of High-Impact ePortfolio Practice; Eynon, B., Gambino, L.M., Eds.; Stylus; Routledge: Oxfordshire, UK, 2018; pp. 32–49. [Google Scholar]
  71. Doyle, A. Important Time Management Skills for Workplace Success. 16 December 2021. Available online: https://www.thebalancemoney.com/time-management-skills-2063776 (accessed on 20 April 2024).
  72. Dweck, C. What Having a “Growth Mindset” Actually Means. Harvard Business Review. 13 January 2016. Available online: https://hbr.org/2016/01/what-having-a-growth-mindset-actually-means (accessed on 20 April 2024).
  73. Schuman-Olivier, Z.; Trombka, M.; Lovas, D.A.; Brewer, J.A.; Vago, D.R.; Gawande, R.; Dunne, J.P.; Lazar, S.W.; Loucks, E.B.; Fulwiler, C. Mindfulness and Behavior Change. Harv. Rev. Psychiatry 2020, 28, 371–394. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Pervaiz, S.; Li, G.; He, Q. The mechanism of goal-setting participation’s impact on employees’ proactive behavior, moderated mediation role of power distance. PLoS ONE 2021, 16, e0260625. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  75. Radu, C. Fostering a Positive Workplace Culture: Impacts on Performance and Agility [Internet]. Human Resource Management—An Update. IntechOpen. 2023. Available online: https://www.intechopen.com/chapters/1170791 (accessed on 20 April 2024).
  76. Thorgren, S.; Wincent, J.; Sirén, C. The Influence of Passion and Work–Life Thoughts on Work Satisfaction. Hum. Resour. Dev. Q. 2013, 24, 469–492. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Simmons, S. 9 Ways to Handle Interruptions Like a Pro. 2011. Available online: http://www.lifehack.org/articles/lifehack/9-ways-to-handle-interruptions-like-a-pro.html (accessed on 20 March 2024).
  78. Manz, C.C.; Manz, K.P. Taking time to consider time, work life, and spirituality: A case in point. J. Manag. Spiritual. Relig. 2017, 14, 279–280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Folabit, N.E.; Reddy, S.; Jita, L.J. Understanding Delegated Administrative Tasks: Beyond Academics’ Professional Identities. Afr. J. Inter/Multidiscip. Stud. 2023, 5, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. James Jacob, W.; Xiong, W.; Ye, H. Professional development programmes at world-class universities. Palgrave Commun. 2015, 1, 15002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Sunder, V.; Mahalingam, S. An empirical investigation of implementing Lean Six Sigma in Higher Education Institutions. Int. J. Qual. Reliab. Manag. 2018, 35, 2157–2180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Davidson, C.; Eversley, S. Practicing the Equitable, Transformative Pedagogy We Preach. Inside Higher Ed. 15 August 2021. Available online: https://www.insidehighered.com/views/2021/08/16/academe-needs-structural-change-toward-more-equitable-pedagogy-opinion (accessed on 20 March 2024).
  83. Kovačič Lukman, R.; Glavič, P. What are the key elements of a sustainable university? Clean Technol. Environ. Policy 2007, 9, 103–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Brown, J.J.; Reingen, P.H. Social ties and word-of-mouth referral behavior. J. Consum. Res. 1987, 14, 350–362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Dearing, J.W. Applying diffusion of innovation theory to intervention development. Res. Soc. Work Pract. 2009, 19, 503–518. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Nyilasy, G. Word of mouth: What we really know–and what we don’t. In Word of Mouth in the Real World; Routledge: Oxfordshire, UK, 2006; Volume 1, pp. 161–184. [Google Scholar]
  87. Hennig-Thurau, T.; Gwinner, K.P.; Walsh, G.; Gremler, D.D. Electronic word-of-mouth via consumer-opinion platforms: What motivates consumers to articulate themselves on the internet? J. Interact. Mark. 2004, 18, 38–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Kincaid, L.; Figueroa, M.E.; Storey, D.; Underwood, C. A Socio-Ecological Model of Communication for Social and Behavioral Change. A Brief Summary. Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. 2009. Available online: https://breakthroughactionandresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/socio-ecological-model-of-communication-for-sbc.pdf (accessed on 20 March 2024).
  89. Kincaid, D.L.; Figueroa, M.E. Communication for participatory development: Dialogue, action, and change. In Routledge Handbook of Applied Communication Research; Frey, L.R., Cissna, K.N., Eds.; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2009; pp. 506–531. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. White, K.; Habib, R.; Hardisty, D.J. How to SHIFT Consumer Behaviors to be More Sustainable: A Literature Review and Guiding Framework. J. Mark. 2019, 83, 22–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Addis, B.A.; Gelaw, Y.M.; Eyowas, F.A.; Bogale, T.W.; Aynalem, Z.B.; Guadie, H.A. “Time wasted by health professionals is time not invested in patients”: Time management practice and associated factors among health professionals at public hospitals in Bahir Dar, Ethiopia: A multicenter mixed method study. Front. Public Health 2023, 11, 1159275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  92. Restivo, V.; Minutolo, G.; Battaglini, A.; Carli, A.; Capraro, M.; Gaeta, M.; Odone, A.; Trucchi, C.; Favaretti, C.; Vitale, F.; et al. Leadership Effectiveness in Healthcare Settings: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Cross-Sectional and Before-After Studies. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 10995. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Meirinhos, G.; Cardoso, A.; Neves, M.; Silva, R.; Rêgo, R. Leadership Styles, Motivation, Communication and Reward Systems in Business Performance. J. Risk Financ. Manag. 2023, 16, 70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Benneworth, P.; Pinheiro, R.; Sánchez-Barrioluengo, M. One Size Does Not Fit All! New Perspectives on the University in the Social Knowledge Economy. Sci. Public Policy 2016, 43, 731–735. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Becker, H.; Mustric, F. Can I Have 5 Minutes of Your Time? Morgan James Publishing: New York, NY, USA, 2008. [Google Scholar]
  96. Macan, T.H. Time management training: Effects on time behaviours, attitudes, and job performance. J. Psychol. 1996, 130, 229–236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  97. Woolthuis, R.K.; Lankhuizen, M.; Gilsing, V. A System Failure Framework for Innovation Policy Design. Technovation 2005, 25, 609–619. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Moudatsou, M.; Stavropoulou, A.; Philalithis, A.; Koukouli, S. The Role of Empathy in Health and Social Care Professionals. Healthcare 2020, 8, 26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Yeo, K.T. Systems thinking and project management—Time to reunite. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 1993, 11, 111–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Tamminga, S.J.; Emal, L.M.; Boschman, J.S.; Levasseur, A.; Thota, A.; Ruotsalainen, J.H.; Schelvis, R.M.; Nieuwenhuijsen, K.; van der Molen, H.F. Individual-level interventions for reducing occupational stress in healthcare workers. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2023, 5, CD002892. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Bozeman, B.; Youtie, J.; Jung, J. Robotic Bureaucracy and Administrative Burden: What Are the Effects of Universities’ Computer Automated Research Grants Management Systems? Res. Policy 2020, 49, 103980. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Rensfeldt, A.B.; Rahm, L. Automating Teacher Work? A History of the Politics of Automation and Artificial Intelligence in Education. Postdigit Sci. Educ. 2023, 5, 25–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Egbuchulem, K.I.; Ogundipe, H.D.; Uwajeh, K. The future is yesterday: Automating the thought process, an impending assault on academic writing. Ann. Ib. Postgrad. Med. 2023, 21, 5–7. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  104. Bornman, J.; Louw, B. Leadership Development Strategies in Interprofessional Healthcare Collaboration: A Rapid Review. J. Healthc. Leadersh. 2023, 15, 175–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  105. Aparicio, J.; Yaneth Rodríguez, D.; Zabala-Iturriagagoitia, J.M. The systemic approach as an instrument to evaluate higher education systems: Opportunities and challenges. Res. Eval. 2021, 30, 336–348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Pfeffer, T.; Stichweh, R. System theoretical perspectives on higher education policy and governance. In The Palgrave International Handbook of Higher Education Policy and Governance; Huisman, J., de Boer, H., Dill, D., Souto-Otero, M., Eds.; Palgrave MacMillan: London, UK, 2015; pp. 152–175. [Google Scholar]
  107. Kamalov, F.; Santandreu Calonge, D.; Gurrib, I. New Era of Artificial Intelligence in Education: Towards a Sustainable Multifaceted Revolution. Sustainability 2023, 15, 12451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Applsci 14 04918 g001
Figure 1. The Eisenhower matrix for academicians.
Figure 1. The Eisenhower matrix for academicians.
Applsci 14 04918 g001
Applsci 14 04918 g002
Figure 2. Academicians’ state chart. It depicts the different states that an academician can exist in. The arrows show the possible flows of the phenomena.
Figure 2. Academicians’ state chart. It depicts the different states that an academician can exist in. The arrows show the possible flows of the phenomena.
Applsci 14 04918 g002
Applsci 14 04918 g003
Figure 3. Causality diagram of time management practices in the Department of Dentistry.
Figure 3. Causality diagram of time management practices in the Department of Dentistry.
Applsci 14 04918 g003
Applsci 14 04918 g004
Figure 4. Graphs1 for the monitoring of the evolution of the model over time.
Figure 4. Graphs1 for the monitoring of the evolution of the model over time.
Applsci 14 04918 g004
Applsci 14 04918 g005
Figure 5. Graphs2 for the monitoring of the evolution of the model over time.
Figure 5. Graphs2 for the monitoring of the evolution of the model over time.
Applsci 14 04918 g005
Applsci 14 04918 g006
Figure 6. The initial stage of model execution based on the values of Table 3.
Figure 6. The initial stage of model execution based on the values of Table 3.
Applsci 14 04918 g006
Applsci 14 04918 g007
Figure 7. The final stage of model execution for a period of 60 months, where all members of the personnel have become TimeON_Academicians.
Figure 7. The final stage of model execution for a period of 60 months, where all members of the personnel have become TimeON_Academicians.
Applsci 14 04918 g007
Applsci 14 04918 g008
Figure 8. The academicians’ transition from the TimeOFF_Academician state to the Motivated_Academician and the TimeON_Academician states over time.
Figure 8. The academicians’ transition from the TimeOFF_Academician state to the Motivated_Academician and the TimeON_Academician states over time.
Applsci 14 04918 g008
Applsci 14 04918 g009
Figure 9. The tasks’ progress over time.
Figure 9. The tasks’ progress over time.
Applsci 14 04918 g009
Applsci 14 04918 g010
Figure 10. Graphs showing the execution of the model for the variables in Example 2.
Figure 10. Graphs showing the execution of the model for the variables in Example 2.
Applsci 14 04918 g010
Applsci 14 04918 g011
Figure 11. Graphs showing the tasks over time for the variables in Example 2.
Figure 11. Graphs showing the tasks over time for the variables in Example 2.
Applsci 14 04918 g011
Applsci 14 04918 g012
Figure 12. Graphs for the comparison of the executions of WOM motivation in Example 1 and 2.
Figure 12. Graphs for the comparison of the executions of WOM motivation in Example 1 and 2.
Applsci 14 04918 g012
Applsci 14 04918 g013
Figure 13. Graphs for the comparison of the executions for the tasks of Example 1 and 2. Red and blue colors suggest differences over time in the execution of the model when there are changes in the factor of the analysis.
Figure 13. Graphs for the comparison of the executions for the tasks of Example 1 and 2. Red and blue colors suggest differences over time in the execution of the model when there are changes in the factor of the analysis.
Applsci 14 04918 g013
Applsci 14 04918 g014
Figure 14. Graphs for the comparison of the executions with the values of Table 4 for academicians. The red color corresponds to B Values and green to C values.
Figure 14. Graphs for the comparison of the executions with the values of Table 4 for academicians. The red color corresponds to B Values and green to C values.
Applsci 14 04918 g014
Applsci 14 04918 g015
Figure 15. Graphs for the comparison of the executions with the values of Table 4 for tasks. The red color corresponds to B Values and green to C values.
Figure 15. Graphs for the comparison of the executions with the values of Table 4 for tasks. The red color corresponds to B Values and green to C values.
Applsci 14 04918 g015
Table 1. Description of the TASM pillars.
Table 1. Description of the TASM pillars.
PillarTools for Time Management
Role definition and delegationManager–leader role: Academicians adopt a manager–leader mindset, focusing on high-impact tasks and delegating non-expertise tasks to others.
Strategic delegation: Use strategic delegation to save time and optimize planning, assigning tasks that do not require specialized skills to support staff [10,72].
Task prioritizationEisenhower matrix: Use the Eisenhower matrix to categorize tasks as urgent and important, not urgent but important, urgent but not important, and not urgent and not important [54,55].
Career evolution focus: Prioritize tasks that align with career goals and professional development [1,55,73,74,75].
Time management techniquesTime blocking: Allocate specific time blocks for focused work on important tasks, minimizing interruptions [83].
Efficient documentation: Utilize efficient documentation tools to streamline administrative tasks and reduce time spent on paperwork [83].
Motivation and well-beingIncorporate enjoyable tasks: Infuse enjoyable activities into daily routines to sustain motivation and enhance well-being [73,74,75].
Minimize interruptions: Set boundaries for interaction time to preserve personal energy and improve focus [81].
Addressing common timewastersPerfectionism, procrastination, seeking no help, and keeping control: Recognize and manage perfectionistic tendencies and procrastination, start seeking help, and let go of constant control to enhance productivity [61,62,63,64,82].
Spiritual perspective: bring joy in academic pursuits and detach from results to maintain a healthy work–life balance [82].
Professional development and educationContinuous professional development: Engage in ongoing professional development to stay current and improve skills [83,84,85,86,87].
Time management education: Integrate time management education into academic training programs to propagate efficient practices [83].
Technological integrationEducational technology: Utilize educational technology to streamline teaching and research activities [83].
Collaborative research tools: Employ collaborative tools to facilitate teamwork and enhance research productivity [83,84,85,86,87].
Health and well-being strategiesMindfulness practices: Incorporate mindfulness practices to reduce stress and improve focus [83,84,85,86,87].
Professional development programs: Implement professional development programs and waste reduction initiatives to foster resilience and well-being [87].
Implementation and evaluationProcess improvement programs: Gradually implement process improvement programs to ensure a balanced approach and maintain educational quality [84].
Regular evaluation: Continuously evaluate and adjust the model based on feedback and changing needs to sustain academic performance and well-being [85,86,87].
Table 2. Parameters of the TASM model.
Table 2. Parameters of the TASM model.
Settings and Values
SettingValue
INITIAL TIME0 months
FINAL TIME60 months (simulation time = 5 years)
Time Unit1 month
Stocks and Explanations
StockExplanation
Original_TasksThe overall tasks created
Rework_to_DoThe tasks that must be redone
TimeOFF_AcademiciansThe number of dentists who do not apply time management
TimeON_AcademiciansThe TimeON academic dentists
Completed_TasksThe overall completed tasks
Undiscovered_ReworkThe undiscovered tasks to be performed
Motivated_AcademiciansThe motivated academic dentists
Dynamic variables and explanations
Dynamic VariableExplanation
Productivity_FactorThe productivity factor
Incoming_TasksThe tasks to be fulfilled for the total academic staff per time unit
Motivation_RateBoth academic and WOM motivation
Adoption_From_WOMThe WOM adoption
MotivationThe academic motivation
Parameters and explanations
ParameterExplanation
AdministrationThe administration tasks per time unit
EducationThe education tasks per time unit
ResearchThe research tasks per time unit
Time_to_Discover_ReworkThe delay time to discover rework to be done
Academic_SupportThe level of academic support per time unit
Time_Educ_HoursThe level of education hours
Academic_LevelThe academic level
Work_LoadThe workload level
TimewasterThe timewaster level
Adoption_FractionThe percentage of WOM adoption
Contact_RateThe number of contacts per time unit
Initial_TimeOn_AcademiciansThe number of initial TimeON academic dentists
Total_Academic_StaffThe total academic dentist staff
Time_to_ReactThe time taken for motivated academic dentists to become TimeON academic dentists
Initial_TasksThe number of initial tasks
Uncompleted_Tasks_FactorThe percentage of uncompleted tasks per time unit
Flows and explanations
FlowExplanation
ProgressThe completed tasks per time unit
Task_RateThe tasks to be fulfilled of the total academic dentist staff per time unit
ReworkThe discovered uncompleted tasks to be fulfilled per time unit
Uncompleted_TasksThe uncompleted tasks per time unit
TransformationThe TimeOFF academic dentists who become motivated academic dentists per time unit
Trans2The acceptance of the time management philosophy and the transformation of motivated dentists into TimeON dentists
Rework_DiscoveryThe discovered uncompleted tasks per time unit
Table 3. Values used for the initial execution of the model.
Table 3. Values used for the initial execution of the model.
Name ValueUnit
Administration 40tasks
Education 32tasks
Research50tasks
Time to discover rework2months
Academic support10%
Time educ hours10%
Academic_level10%
Workload10%
Timewasters10%
Adoption fraction10%
Contact rate0persons/month
Initial time on academicians6persons
Total academic staff63persons
Time_to_react6months
Initial tasks20tasks
Uncompleted tasks factor5%
Table 4. Selected variables’ variations.
Table 4. Selected variables’ variations.
Name Value BValue C
Administration 4024
Education 3232
Research5050
Time to discover rework22
Academic support10%20%
Time educ hours10%20%
Academic_level10%20%
Workload10%5%
Timewasters10%5%
Adoption fraction10%10%
Contact rate22
Initial time on academicians66
Total academic staff6363
Time_to_react66
Initial tasks2020
Uncompleted tasks factor5%5%
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Antoniadou, M.; Antoniadis, R. A Systemic Model for Resilience and Time Management in Healthcare Academia: Application in a Dental University Setting. Appl. Sci. 2024, 14, 4918. https://doi.org/10.3390/app14114918

AMA Style

Antoniadou M, Antoniadis R. A Systemic Model for Resilience and Time Management in Healthcare Academia: Application in a Dental University Setting. Applied Sciences. 2024; 14(11):4918. https://doi.org/10.3390/app14114918

Chicago/Turabian Style

Antoniadou, Maria, and Rallis Antoniadis. 2024. "A Systemic Model for Resilience and Time Management in Healthcare Academia: Application in a Dental University Setting" Applied Sciences 14, no. 11: 4918. https://doi.org/10.3390/app14114918

APA Style

Antoniadou, M., & Antoniadis, R. (2024). A Systemic Model for Resilience and Time Management in Healthcare Academia: Application in a Dental University Setting. Applied Sciences, 14(11), 4918. https://doi.org/10.3390/app14114918

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop